Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33968755›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in oncology2021

Care as Usual: An Acceptable Strategy to Apply During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a French Tertiary Gynecologic Oncology Department.

Guillaume Blache, Houssein El Hajj, Camille Jauffret, Gilles Houvenaeghel, Laura Sabiani, Julien Barrou, Isabelle Masquin, Jérémy Le Saout, Djamel Mokart, Marion Faucher and 1 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in oncology, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. COVID-19 mortality risk among women with ovarian cancer: a matched case-control study.Brazilian journal of medical and biological research = Revista brasileira de pesquisas medicas e biologicas · 2026
    Article
  4. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors.

Guillaume BlacheDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Houssein El HajjDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Camille JauffretDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Gilles HouvenaeghelDepartment of surgical oncology, Institut Paoli-Calmettes and CRCM, CNRS, INSERM, Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France.
Laura SabianiDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Julien BarrouDepartment of surgical oncology, Institut Paoli-Calmettes and CRCM, CNRS, INSERM, Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France.
Isabelle MasquinDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Jérémy Le SaoutDepartment of Surgical Oncology, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Djamel MokartDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Marion FaucherDepartment of Anesthesiology and Critical Care, Paoli Calmettes Institute, Marseille, France.
Eric LambaudieDepartment of surgical oncology, Institut Paoli-Calmettes and CRCM, CNRS, INSERM, Aix Marseille Université, Marseille, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

We describe and analyze a "care as usual" strategy of a French Comprehensive Cancer Center during the COVID-19 pandemic to manage surgical patients with gynecological cancer. We conducted a retrospective analysis evaluating the surgical activity in our gynecologic oncology department between January 21 and May 12, 2020. We compared the surgical activity and surgical and oncologic outcomes during the pre-lockdown period and the pandemic period. The main objective was to evaluate the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on surgical activity. The secondary objectives were to analyze the surgical and the oncologic outcomes. We compared the surgical activity during the 8 weeks after the national lockdown (85 procedures) to the surgical activity in the 8 weeks preceding the lockdown (127 procedures). We observed a 33% decrease in activity between the two periods. The clinical and epidemiologic characteristics were similar between the two periods. There were no differences between the surgical approaches (

Indexed as

COVID 19 pandemicgynecologic oncologypatient centered clinical pathwaysurgical activitysurgical oncology

Identifiers

PMID33968755
PMCPMC8097084

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.